Democratic Theorists and Party Scholars: Why They Don't Talk to Each Other, and Why They Should

Ingrid Van Biezen, Michael Saward

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

36 Citations (Scopus)
423 Downloads (Pure)


Despite their importance to one another, the current literatures on political parties and normative democratic theory continue to develop largely in mutual isolation. Empirical studies of contemporary political parties and party systems tend to have little to say about the meanings and possibilities of democracy, and therefore also about the varied potential roles of political parties within it. Meanwhile, contemporary democratic theorists quietly sidestep the issue of whether political parties perform a legitimate function in democracies. This lack of mutual engagement is regrettable, in particular given the pervasive erosion of popular support and legitimacy of political parties as representative institutions. In this article we explore the key reasons for democratic theorists and scholars of political parties so rarely taking on each others' core concerns, and we outline the key ways in which this mutual disengagement is mutually impoverishing. We will also suggest ways forward, by pinpointing and illustrating potentially productive areas of engagement which might serve to deepen our understanding of democracy's present and its possible futures.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)31-35
JournalPerspectives on Politics
Issue number01
Publication statusPublished - 1 Mar 2008


Dive into the research topics of 'Democratic Theorists and Party Scholars: Why They Don't Talk to Each Other, and Why They Should'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this